Hi all,
Since Fedora 11 Alpha is quickly approaching, here is a much-delayed
edition of the fonts SIG irregular status report.
I should probably have done one for Fedora 10 release, but (silly me)
expected then that the new font packaging guidelines would be adopted
quickly. After all, they only
As I wrote before, I don't think we could win a lot by automating.
Well I tend to agree now: a good set of templates and rpm macros seems the
right way to go.
Jens
___
Fedora-fonts-list mailing list
Fedora-fonts-list@redhat.com
Le Mar 18 novembre 2008 11:33, Ralf Corsepius a écrit :
On Tue, 2008-11-18 at 11:11 +0100, Nicolas Mailhot wrote:
Le Mar 18 novembre 2008 09:32, Ralf Corsepius a écrit :
Please review
http://nim.fedorapeople.org/rpm-fonts/rpm-fonts-1.8-1.fc11.src.rpm
and the other files in this
Le Mar 18 novembre 2008 11:33, Ralf Corsepius a écrit :
I will vote against this proposal and this package.
Rationale:
All these macros do is causing further pollution of the rpm macros,
break many details (try rpmbuild --define '_datadir /opt/foo' and
add
further cross
Le lundi 10 novembre 2008 à 18:58 -0500, Jens Petersen a écrit :
Actually we have 57 since Behdad requested FersiWeb fonts and no one
I should not be that hard really to generate a script to generate a
skeleton spec file for any given font .
I know some packaging people frown on automated
